The December 7 virtual summit between President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin proved (as expected) an uneven match. According to the short White House readout, Biden threatened Russia with “strong economic and other measures” in the event of military escalation and reiterated his support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. (There was no mention of sanctions for Russia’s use of soft power to overthrow the democratically elected government of Ukraine). In contrast, the virtual summit format gave Putin free reign to mount an uninterrupted 700-word full-throated attack on the West. Putin’s “frank” indictment of Ukraine, NATO, and the US was meant for his domestic audience and for those many in the West ambivalent towards Ukraine. At no time in the two-hour discussion did Biden attempt to rebut any of Putin’s charges, no matter how outrageous. With the attention of the world focused on the Russian build up on the Ukrainian border, Biden passed on the opportunity to present a clear account of his side of the case. Perhaps Biden is unclear as to what his “side” really is.
The two sides
disagreed even on why the virtual summit was called. Per Biden, the summit was
called to address the Russian threat to Ukraine. Putin claimed the main topics
were the “the internal Ukrainian crisis and the lack of progress in the
implementation of the Minsk agreements… which are the uncontested basis for a
peaceful settlement.” Putin proceeded to complain about “the destructive line
of Kiev, aimed at completely dismantling the Minsk agreements.” He also
condemned “Kiev's provocative actions against Donbass." So Ukraine is the
real threat not the 100,000 troops poised on Ukraine’s border. It would not be
hard for Biden to have rebutted this claim.
So we learn from
Putin’s summit monologue that the true aggressors are NATO and the United
States. Ukraine is merely a puppet, but a dangerous one that has no claim to
legitimacy. Given the alleged imminent threat facing Russia, Putin contends
that the West should offer guarantees that would rule out NATO expansion to the
east. (I guess the Swedish and Dutch armies should stand down with no invasion
of Russia in the works.)
The Russian press
release briefly mentions Biden’s "allegedly" threatening "nature
of the movements of Russian troops near the Ukrainian borders and outlined
sanctions measures that the United States and its allies would be ready to
apply in case of further escalation of the situation.” Putin’s response is that
NATO is the threat in its “dangerous attempts to conquer Ukrainian territory and
building up its military potential at our borders.”
The Russian
Interfax release characterized the conversation as “frank and
businesslike" Both presidents agreed to instruct their representatives to
enter into substantive consultations on these sensitive issues. Good luck.
After the summit’s
conclusion, Biden sent out spokespersons to clarify that he meant business. The
new sanctions could include the newly-completed Nord Stream 2 pipeline. The
Kremlin meanwhile took advantage of Biden’s ambiguity by claiming
that both presidents agreed to negotiate the status of Ukraine and that NATO's growing ties with Ukraine and the possibility of
the alliance deploying missiles targeted against Russia there represent a
"red line" that cannot be crossed.
The key takeaways
from the December 7 summit are: First, we must recognize that the two sides are
separated by a Grand-Canyon-like chasm. Second, the differences are too great
for a political solution, unless the West decides to capitulate. Third, even in
the case of capitulation, the Russian side cannot be counted on to live up to
its side of the agreement. (If it is
agreed that Ukraine must remain neutral, Russia will proceed to destroy all
politically neutral forces in Ukraine). Fourth, we cannot afford to have
summits that allow Putin free reign to tell his version of truth unrebutted. We
now see that Biden is clearly not up to the task. Let’s hope he gives up on the
idea of personal diplomacy.
